DANGEROUS WATERS: AMERICA`S COAL ASH CRISIS

Transcription

Seattle
Olympia
!
Portland
!
Helena
Salem
!
Bismarck
!
Augusta
Montpelier
!
Saint Paul
Boise
!
!
Pierre
!
!
Salt Lake City
!
!
!
! !
Sacramento
Lincoln
Springfield
Denver
San Jose
!
!
Topeka
!
!
Jefferson City
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!
!!
!
Baltimore
!
Charleston
!
! !!
!
Oklahoma City
Memphis
!
!
!
!
New York
Philadelphia
Richmond
Nashville
!
!!
Charlotte
Dover
! Annapolis
!
!
!!
!
!
Raleigh
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Columbia
Little Rock
Phoenix
Hartford
Trenton
Harrisburg
!
Santa Fe
Atlanta
!
!
!
!
!!
!!!
SPILL SITES
!!
!!!
!
!!
!
San Diego
!
!
!
!
! Columbus !
! !!
Indianapolis
Frankfort
!!
Potential
Disasters
!
!
!
Los Angeles
Providence
Detroit
!
!!
! !
!
!
! !!
!
!
!
Albany
!
Lansing
!
!!
Boston
!
!
Milwaukee
!
!!
Carson City
San Francisco
!
Chicago
!
Des Moines
!
Cheyenne
!
Madison
Concord
!
!
!
!
Dallas
El Paso
!
!
Montgomery
Jackson
!
!
Tallahassee
Jacksonville
Baton Rouge
HIGH HAZARD
Austin
Houston
San Antonio
!
Coal ash
waste ponds
!
!
*The EPA now assigns hazard ratings to coal ash ponds:
“high hazard” indicates that an impoundment failure would likely cause loss of human life;
“significant hazard” indicates that an impoundment failure would cause significant economic, environmental, or infrastructure damage.
Visit http://content.sierraclub.org/coal/water to view an interactive map of these sites.
DANGEROUS WATERS:
AMERICA’S COAL ASH CRISIS
Each year, coal-fired power plants in the United States produce 140 million
tons of hazardous solid waste, known as coal ash. Much of this waste is
stored in more than 1,400 sites in 45 states. Coal ash pits vary widely, based
on whether waste is stored in ponds (wet impoundments) or landfills (dry
impoundments) as well as on their size and the level of hazard they present to
human life.
Coal ash pits often reside adjacent to the power
The Risks of Coal Ash
plants that produces their toxic contents. Because
When coal ash spills, leaks or leaches into nearby
vast quantities of water are consumed in coal power
groundwater or waterways, the toxins contained within
generation, these power plants lie beside large sources
pose serious health risks to nearby communities. In fact,
of water, including our Great Lakes, aquifers, and many
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) found that
of our most important and iconic rivers.
living near certain coal ash ponds is significantly more
Coal ash is the byproduct of coal combustion mixed
dangerous than smoking a pack of cigarettes a day.
with other hazardous compounds including those
A person living within one mile of an unlined coal ash
used to clean coal furnaces (imagine oven cleaner on
pond that co-disposes of coal refuse has a 1 in 50
an industrial scale). As technology has allowed power
lifetime risk of cancer — more than 2,000 times higher
plants to capture more hazardous pollutants that would
than the EPA goal for cancer risk. According to the EPA,
have gone into our air, these toxins — including mercury
1.54 million American children live near coal ash
and arsenic — increasingly become part of the solid
storage sites.1
waste mixture that is coal ash. We have essentially
traded one form of toxic pollution for another.
1
Coal ash contains many toxic contaminants, including
arsenic, lead, mercury, hexavalent chromium, and
Coal Ash: A Danger to Our Nation’s Health
selenium, as well as aluminum, barium, boron, and
chlorine. These toxins can cause cancer, heart damage,
lung disease, respiratory distress, kidney disease,
reproductive problems, gastrointestinal illness, birth
defects, and impaired bone growth in children. In short,
coal ash toxics have the potential to damage every one
of our major organ systems.
No Federal Safeguards
Incredibly, there are no federal standards for the storage
and disposal of coal ash to protect communities and
waterways from coal ash pollution; no federal standards
exist for monitoring groundwater or reporting coal
ash pit integrity or pollution. What exists in place of a
strong, uniform standard is a disjoined and ineffective
jumble of state-based regulations.
Many coal ash dumps lack basic safety features and
regular inspections, leaving communities at risk of largescale disasters like those in Kingston, Tennessee (see
box: The Kingston Disaster) and North Carolina (see
section: The Dan River Spill). Far more common than a
full impoundment failure, however, are the unreported
slow leaching of coal ash and pond overflows that
pollute our water. Many states do not require owners
to line coal ash ponds or monitor nearby groundwater.
The EPA has confirmed water contamination from coal
ash in every state where coal ash is stored — more than
200 cases in all. However, because there are no federal
standards to require reporting, the full picture of coal
ash pollution and the damage it causes remains murky.
T h e K i n g sto n D i sast er
On December 22, 2008, a massive coal ash dam
failed at the Kingston Fossil Plant in Kingston,
Tennessee, releasing a river of toxic coal ash
sludge into the surrounding community. In what
Public Demand for Coal Ash Protections
is the largest toxic waste spill in U.S. history, 1.1
As part of a settlement with affected communities and
billion gallons of toxic sludge poured across 300
environmental groups, the U.S. Environmental Protection
acres of land, damaging or destroying 40 homes,
Agency must finalize new federal standards for the
and polluting the Emory and Clinch Rivers.
disposal of coal ash by the end of 2014.
Already the Tennessee Valley Authority has spent
Communities on the frontlines of the coal ash fight, as
well as public health and environmental groups, are
calling for strong, federally enforceable protections
more than $1 billion in clean-up efforts, and the
total economic impact of the spill is estimated at
upwards of $3 billion.
for public health and safety. These safeguards should
include:
• Phasing out dangerous wet impoundments and
cleaning up and closing existing ponds;
• Ensuring coal ash landfills are properly lined and
that groundwater around the sites is monitored for
contamination;
• Requiring owners to clean up coal ash contamination
before it enters drinking water and waterways;
• Requiring owners to provide “financial assurance” in
order to protect the community and taxpayers from
the cost of cleanup.
2
!
Madison
!
!
Rockford
Cedar Rapids
maha
Des Moines
!
Springfield
opeka
Overland Park
Potential
Disasters
Jefferson City
!
Toledo
!
! Saint Louis
SPILL SITES
!!
!
!
!
!
!
Pittsbur
! Columbus !
! !!
Dayton
Indianapolis
!!
Louisville
!!
Frankfort
!
Akron
!
!!
!
Cleveland
Fort Wayne
!
!
Erie
!
! !!
Gary
!
!
!
Kansas
City Independence
Sterling Heights
Warren
Livonia
Detroit
Ann Arbor
Chicago
Naperville
Aurora
!
!
Peoria
! !
ncoln
!
Lansing
!
!
!!
!
Grand Rapids
Milwaukee
!!
!! Cincinnati
!
!!
!
Charles
!! Lexington
Evansville
HIGH HAZARD
Coal Springfield
ash
waste ponds
!
!
! !!
The Toxic Legacy of Coal Ash in ILLINOIS
Winsto
Knoxville
ulsa
o
and
as
Nashville that still pose a
With 58 operating coal ash dams and 15 “legacy” ponds
! !
danger to adjacent communities, Illinois ranks first in the nation in total
number of coal ash ponds. Taking only active coal ash ponds
into account,
! Chattanooga
Memphis
Illinois ranks second in total surface
area for its! coal ash ponds with over 3.3
!
Huntsville
Colum
square miles of coalLittle
ashRock
wet impoundments. After EPA inspections of 38
Illinois
coal ash ponds for structural stability, the agency rated 16 ponds in
!
Atlanta
the state in “poor” condition. Only 3 of the 38
ponds
inspected
were
rated Augusta !
Birmingham
!
“satisfactory.”
!
Macon
State protections for Illinois communities from these
state that have been studied. Harmful pollutants
numerous large coal ash sites and the substantial threat
discovered at these sites include arsenic,
boron, chloride,
Columbus
! Shreveport
to health
they pose, however, are sorely lacking. State
!
regulation does not require liners or groundwater
Jackson
monitoring for all coal ash sites, and the Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) recently found
that only a third of the state’s coal ash ponds are lined
or monitored.
iron, lead, manganese, mercury,
nitrate, elevated pH,
Montgomery
selenium, sulfate, and thallium.2
!
Sites where contamination has been found are
Powerton Station, Duck Creek Station, Hennepin Power
Station, Havana Power Plant, Vermillion Power Station,
!
Tallahassee
Hutsonville Power Station, Wood River Power
Station,
A 2010 IEPA assessment categorized
10 active coal ash
Baton Rouge
Mobile
Coffeen/White & Brewer Fly Ash Landfill, Lakeside
sites in Illinois as having “high” to
“very high” potential
Lafayette
Power Station, Joppa Power Station, Prairie Power Pearl
to
Station, Ameren-Meredosia, Waukegan, Venice Plant,
Beaumont
contaminate
nearby drinking water sources. Coal
Houston
ash has already been found to have contaminated
Pasadena
New Orleans
groundwater countless times at all 15 site across the
3
Jackso
and Joliet 29, Marion Plant, and Joliet 9 Generating
Station.3
Clearwater
!
State Regu lation
PON DS
Groundwater Monitoring Required
for All New and Existing Sites
None
Liners Required for New Sites*
None
Site Construction in
Water Table Prohibited*
None
L a n d fil l s
None
Financial Assurance Required
*Required on an ad hoc basis but not uniformly by law.
Following major coal ash spills in Tennessee and North
antimony, boron, chloride, iron, lead, manganese,
Carolina, the IEPA is moving forward with new rules for
mercury, nitrate, selenium, sulfate, and thallium in
coal ash ponds. However, the state’s proposed rules fall
groundwater resources.
short of protecting Illinois communities from the serious
harm that coal ash pits pose. For example, while the
rules would require a facility to take corrective action if
a site is found to be contaminating groundwater, they
would not require that the site be closed. Further, the
rules would not require complete removal of waste when
a coal ash pit is retired. Many of the state’s coal ash
pits are located in floodplains or other sensitive areas.
Allowing toxic coal ash to remain, rather than requiring it
be moved to lined landfills, represents an unacceptable
risk to nearby communities.
Local activists and environmental groups in the
state have also called for owners to provide financial
assurances for all coal ash pits, so communities don’t get
stuck with the bill for cleanup along with a phase out of
coal ash wet storage and a move to dry landfill storage;
an assessment of all sites for potential breaches and dam
Coal ash throughout Illinois, and in particular at the E.D.
Edwards coal plant owned by Dynegy (detailed in the
following section of this report), pose serious concerns
for public health and the safety of our waterways,
groundwater, and drinking water sources. The ongoing
challenges that communities face in remedying the
problem of coal ash pollution — in Illinois and in all states
where coal ash is stored — point to the need for strong
federal safeguards.
ILLINOIS: S n a p shot of
Coa l Ash R isks & R e gulat i o n
Number of
Coal Ash Ponds
High-Hazard Sites
84
2
failures; and greater public engagement including public
comment on plans to correct and close pits, and public
Significant Hazard Sites
22
Documented Cases
of Water Contamination
or Spills
20
IEPA meetings to address community concerns.4
Due to documented water impacts and lax regulation,
Sierra Club, Environmental Law & Policy Center, Prairie
Rivers Network, and Citizens Against Ruining the
Environment filed legal action before Illinois’ Pollution
Control Board to force plant operators to clean up
ash ponds that are causing unsafe levels of arsenic,
4
Disaster Waiting to Happen:
The E.D. Edwards Coal Plant
The outdated and unlined E.D. Edwards coal-fired power plant in Bartonville,
owned by Dynegy, lies on the banks of the Illinois River. It has operated for
more than 50 years and still pollutes central Illinois communities including
Peoria, Bartonville, Pekin and East Peoria.
Throughout its half century of operations, the E.D.
By the companies own reported data, the E.D. Edwards
Edwards plant has stored large amounts of coal ash
plant discharges over four million gallons of coal ash
dangerously close to the Illinois River. The accumulated
wastewater into the Illinois River each day. The ash
toxic coal ash currently sits in an 89-acre, 32-foot-
discharge — a cocktail of bottom ash and fly ash —
deep pond near the plant and has caused documented
carries with it toxic metals like metals like arsenic,
groundwater contamination around the site. This
lead and mercury. To date, the Illinois Environmental
legacy of pollution has left the Illinois River “impaired”
Protection Agency has failed to place limits under
for mercury, leading the state of Illinois to post fish
the plants water discharge permit on the amount of
consumption warnings.5
dangerous heavy metal pollution that the E.D. Edwards
plant can send from its ash ponds into the river.6
“It is disheartening to know that polluters are given a
free pass to discharge toxic metals into our waterways.
The Illinois River, Pekin Lake and our other local fishing
spots define summertime here in Peoria. We boat, we
fish and we recreate in that water. Right now, the fish
that come from the Illinois River is too dangerous to eat.
The Illinois River is already designated as an impaired
waterway because of mercury contamination. Active
coal-fired power plants are the largest sources of these
toxic pollutants nationally.
Our families and our rivers deserve better than
The E.D. Edwards coal plant sits on the Illinois River
toxic pollution.”
upstream from recreational areas where families gather,
— Jacob Leibel, Peoria Resident and member of the
Central Illinois Healthy Community Alliance
5
Ash Pond Safety Risks
including Pekin Lake and fishing sites along both sides of
E.W. edwards ’s Coal As h Po n d
Number of Coal Ash Ponds
1
because the coal ash pit at Dynegy’s retired Vermillion
coal plant is also fouling local water.
In the company’s quarterly report to the U.S. Securities
Exchange Commission in summer 2013, Dynegy
explained that it has been doing “hydrogeologic”
Total Known Capacity
587,000,000
investigations at the Vermilion coal plant site, and
gallons7
results have shown that the coal ash pits are affecting
groundwater in the area.9 This leaking coal ash pit is
Hazard Level
Signficiant8
also close to Illinois’ only National Scenic Waterway, the
Middle Fork Vermilion River.
Known Groundwater
Contamination
Sulfate, iron,
Residents across the State of Illinois have been spurred
manganese
to action after witnessing the coal ash catastrophe
unfold along the Dan River in North Carolina. In order to
USEPA Geologic
Vulnerability Rating
Very High
Dam Safety Permit Required
for Pit?
No
USEPA Potable Well
Contamination Potential
High
keep the burden of cleanup off the shoulders of small
Illinois communities, a strong state coal ash rule that will
determine how and when utilities close and clean up
dangerous coal ash pits is vital.
At statewide hearings on the Illinois coal ash rule,
residents living in near coal ash pits have asked the
IPCB to require the removal of coal ash from failing pits
the river. The Edwards plant puts the health of families
to high and dry landfills, allow for the assessment and
who enjoy Peoria’s resources at risk by discharging toxic
prevention of damage to rivers and lakes, and provide
polluted water.
more opportunity for public input. They are also urging
Uncertainty About the Future, Dynegy’s
Response to a Potential Coal Ash Disaster
a requirement that power companies provide financial
Dynegy, a Texas-based energy company, took over
assurances so that taxpayers aren’t left paying the bill
for coal ash disaster clean-up.
ownership of the E.D. Edwards coal plant in late 2013
Illinoisans — and all Americans — deserve strong,
after decades of ownership by Ameren.
federally enforceable coal ash protections. They will
Dynegy requested a variance from the Illinois Pollution
Control Board (IPCB) to have until 2020 to comply with
Illinois’ Multi-Pollutant Standard, established in 2006 to
require reductions in life-threatening air pollution from
Illinois coal plants. The company claimed that complying
continue to work for change at the state level, but
the U.S Environmental Protection Agency must act
to protect the health, safety and financial future of all
communities put at risk from coal ash pollution.
“Illinois’s aging coal ash pits were built in places they
with Illinois’ common-sense clean air standard would
never should have been — over mine voids and in
cause it undue financial hardship. The IPCB voted
floodplains of rivers. Our state can’t afford to take
three to one in favor of granting the variance, with
on the liability and expense for more groundwater
the dissenting opinion of IPCB Chair Deanna Glosser
contamination from ash pits or clean up after one of
doubting Dynegy’s claims of financial hardship.
these toxic dinosaurs collapses into one of our rivers.
Dynegy’s history of bankruptcy and mismanagement
Governor Quinn and our state regulators have the
begs the question of how the company would financially
opportunity right now to enact rules that will prevent
or environmentally handle a coal ash disaster at the
disaster and ensure the utilities are taking responsibility.”
E.D. Edwards coal ash pit. Local residents are wary of
— Traci Barkley, Water Resources Scientist with Prairie Rivers Network
Dynegy’s track record for coal ash in the State of Illinois
6
!
Madison
!
!
Rockford
!
!
Peoria
! !
Springfield
Gary
!
!
! Saint Louis
Toledo
!
Cleveland
!!
!
!
!
!!!
!
Pittsburgh !
!
!
!
!
! Columbus !
!
! !!
Akron
Fort Wayne
!!
!
Erie
!
!
!
!
Sterling Heights
Warren
Livonia
Detroit
Ann Arbor
! !!
Chicago
!
!!
!
!
Lansing
!
Naperville
Aurora
!
Grand Rapids
Milwaukee
Dayton
Indianapolis
!
!
!
! Cincinnati
!
!!
!!
!
!!
Louisville
!!
Frankfort
!! Lexington
Charleston
Potential
Disasters
Evansville
SPILL SITES
HIGH HAZARD
!
!
Coal ash
waste ponds
!
!
Greensboro
Winston-Salem
The Toxic Legacy of Coal! Ash
in Indiana !!
!!
Knoxville
Coal-fired power plants in the Hoosier State produce a whopping 9.5 million
!
Nashville
!
!
tons of coal ash waste each year, making it second in the nation! in the!amount
Charlotte
of coal ash it generates. Indiana has more operating coal ash ponds than any
other state in the nation.10
!
Chattanooga
!
Indiana has some of the weakest protections
for
Memphis
2. Indiana’s record of spills and drinking water
residents, property, and water quality from theHuntsville
dangers
Rock of coal ash. According to Earthjustice:11
!
!
contamination is among the worst in the nation: 15
Columbia
contaminated sites and spills, including a Superfund
1. State regulations fail to require the safe disposal of
coal ash and to require appropriate safeguards, such
Birmingham
as pond liners to protect groundwater,
groundwater
site involving contaminated wells in the Town of Pines
!
!
that has still
not been cleaned up.
Atlanta
Augusta
The state has an alarmingly poor record of coal ash dam
!
plans, and design of levees and dams by professional
safety and water contamination, lacking many basic
Macon
protections against coal
ash pollution. In fact, of the
engineers.
41 coal ash dams inspected by the U.S. Environmental
monitoring, regular inspections, emergency response
Protection Agency in Indiana, 25 (60 percent) were
Savannah
rated inColumbus
“poor” condition.
Montgomery
Jackson
7
!
State Regulation
PON DS
L a n d fil l s
None
None
Liners Required for New Sites
None
None
Site Construction in Water
Table Prohibited
None
None
None
There have been two major spills from coal ash ponds at
safety of surrounding community posed by the Harding
the Eagle Valley Generating Station in Martinsville (each
Street Station in Indianapolis. Together these sites — and
involving upwards of 30 million gallons of contaminated
dangerous coal ash sites across the country — show the
water) and two spills at the R.M. Schahfer in Wheatfield.
need for strong, federally enforceable protections.
Coal ash pollution has contaminated groundwater at
11 sites, including at the Town of Pines, where leaking
coal ash from a nearby pond contaminated drinking
water with arsenic, boron, molybdenum and other toxic
substances, requiring installation of a public water
system and leading to the town being designated a
federal Superfund site.
Safeguards to protect the public from coal ash
disasters like those that took place in Tennessee and
North Carolina are nonexistent in Indiana. Indiana has
no requirement that coal ash dams be designed by a
professional engineer, no requirement to inspect dams,
no reporting requirements, no inundation mapping in
case of floods, no requirement for emergency action
plans, and no financial assurance requirements.
Similarly, state law fails to protect drinking water and
surface water from the leaching of toxic chemicals
from coal ash. The state does not require groundwater
monitoring or liners at all ponds and landfills.
Regulations even fail to prohibit dumping of coal ash
directly into the water table.12
Indiana’s 11 documented cases of water contamination
by coal ash pollution, the poisoning of an entire town’s
149. Ash Pond 4A - Inlet/Outlet to Ash Pond 4B at Southeastern
I n d iaofnPond,
a : SDamage
n a p shot
of
to 30-inch-Diameter
CMP Visible
Corner
Number of
Coal Ash Ponds
High-Hazard Sites
78
5
37
Documented Cases
or Spills
15
drinking water, its four large ash pond spills, and 25
coal ash dams with “poor” ratings are the direct result
of the state’s lack of safeguards. You will also read in
the following section about the risks to the health and
8
Harding Street Coal Ash
For more than 50 years, Indianapolis Power & Light’s (IPL) Harding Street
coal-burning power plant has sent toxic pollution into the air, land, and water
of Indiana’s largest urban area. Located just 15 minutes from downtown
Indianapolis, IPL’s Harding Street plant is the biggest polluter in Marion
County – responsible for 88 percent of industrial toxic emissions reported to
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Toxic Release Inventory.13 More
than 35,000 people live within three miles of the plant.14
For as long as IPL has been burning coal on the south
Threats to Drinking Water
side of Indianapolis, it has been dumping toxic coal
Though the Harding Street plant has long disposed
ash waste into unlined ponds located adjacent to
of its waste in coal ash ponds, IPL does not monitor
the Harding Street plant. The plant’s five coal ash
groundwater adjacent to these ponds or report results
ponds, two of which are rated “high hazard” by the
to state or federal agencies. Historic records from
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for their
the Marion County Public Health Department show
potential to cause loss of human life in the event of a
groundwater contamination in monitoring wells at the
dam breach, sit just a stone’s throw from the White River
perimeter of the ash ponds in the 1980s.17 According
and lie upstream from nearby neighborhoods. According
to J. Russell Boulding, a geologist hired by the Hoosier
to EPA records, above-ground levees holding back the
Environmental Council, concentrations of arsenic were
coal ash are more than 17,000 feet long and up to 48
twice the EPA standard for drinking water and
feet high. When full, the ponds could contain more than
mercury levels were 20 times the standard. Boron
310 million gallons of coal ash and contaminated water.
results were three times EPA’s child health advisory for
15
16
drinking water.18
9
“The nearest residential area, a
neighborhood known as Sunshine
Gardens, is located only 1.5 miles
downstream from the Harding Street
Station coal ash ponds.
Many residents of this neighborhood
rely on groundwater wells for their
drinking and household water.
The water wells used by residents
of this neighborhood are located in the
same White River outwash aquifer that
lies below the Harding Street Station.”
—Hoosier Environmental Council
“The high concentrations of signature coal ash
contaminants arsenic and boron dating from the late
1980s suggest that contaminants have been migrating
from the ash ponds for a considerable amount of
time,” Boulding said in his March 2014 report. “Given
slurry spills at its Martinsville power plant in 2007 and
2008, IPL had no written maintenance program and
no emergency action plan for the Harding Street ash
ponds in 2010. According to the engineering consulting
firm CDM, which conducted the assessment for EPA,
a breach at Pond 2 or Pond 4 could “cause property
damage at an adjacent stone quarry and possibly result
in quarry worker’s loss of life.” A failure of ash ponds
2 or 3 also could send toxic coal ash into Lick Creek
and White River, harming the river environment and
potentially causing property damage or loss of life in
communities downstream.23
The Harding Street coal ash ponds are located in the
White River’s 100-year flood plain, which is connected
to the city’s well-field protection areas downstream.
According to the Hoosier Environmental Council, a large
flood could wash coal ash pollutants into surrounding
neighborhoods and the well-field protection area,
which is designed to protect groundwater that supplies
drinking water throughout the city.24
the highly permeable character of the sand and gravel
Mercury-Contaminated Fish
aquifer, contaminants may have migrated well beyond
Fish in the White River are already contaminated with
the perimeter monitoring wells in the [past] twenty-five
years.”
mercury, making many fish unsafe for children and
young women to eat.25,26 Pollution controls that will
Boulding concluded that contamination could
reduce mercury coming from power plant smokestacks
potentially have spread to private drinking water wells
will transfer more mercury into coal ash waste, putting
in the Sunshine Gardens neighborhood and could
White River and other waterways at even greater risk if
even pose a threat to the city’s major drinking water
coal ash is not safely handled and disposed in ways that
wells nearby. In April, the Marion County Public Health
don’t contaminate Indiana’s water.27
Department agreed to test private wells in the area for
boron, a marker of coal ash contamination.21 The Sierra
Club is calling for further investigation to determine the
T he H a r d in g St r e e t Stat io n
coa l ash p on ds
extent of groundwater contamination under the ponds
and how far it has traveled. Residents have a right to
know whether their drinking water is contaminated
today and, if not, that it will be protected from future
Number of Coal
Ash Ponds
8
spread of contamination.
Total Known
Capacity
310,000,000 gallons19
Dangerous High Hazard Ponds
Hazard Level
High (Ponds 2 and 4)20
Known
Groundwater
Contamination
High levels of mercury,
arsenic and boron
Between 2009 and 2013, the EPA launched
investigations into the structural safety of coal ash
ponds nationwide.22 The assessment rated two Harding
Street coal ash ponds as “high hazard” and rated all
six Harding Street coal ash ponds in “poor” condition.
Despite experiencing two 30-million-gallon coal ash
10
ngfield
!
!!
!
!
! Saint Louis
!!
!
!
!
!
Columbus
Dayton
! !!
Indianapolis
!
!
!
! Cincinnati
!
!!
!!
!
!!
Louisville
!!
Frankfort
!! Lexington
Arlin
Alex
Charleston
Richmo
Evansville
! !
!
SPILL SITES
Potential
Disasters
!
!
! !!
Durha
Greensboro
HIGH HAZARD
Ra
Winston-Salem
!! Coal ash !
waste ponds
!
!
! !
! Charlotte
The Toxic Legacy of Coal Ash in Kentucky
!
Kentucky is both a leading coal-burning and coal ash producing state,
! Chattanooga
generating
more
than
nine
million
tons of toxic coal ash annually. The state is
Memphis
!
!
home to 48 coal ash ponds, eight of which
are rated high hazard. Kentucky
!
!
Knoxville
Nashville
Huntsville
Columbia
has the third largest coal ash storage capacity in the nation
— 64,000 acrefeet or enough toxic sludge to cover the Churchill Downs Racetrack, home to
Atlanta
!
the Kentucky Derby, under 800 feet of toxic
sludge. Augusta !
!
Birmingham
Yet, state agencies that should be protecting the health
presence of eight high-hazard dams that would likely
of residents from coal ash toxins require virtually no
take human lives
in the event of failure.
Macon
safeguards at coal ash sites. Incredibly, 20 of the state’s
48 coal ash dams were not designed by professional
engineers. Only 32 of Kentucky’s dams have been
Groundwater contamination from coal ash dumping
has already been documented at five sites in Kentucky,
Columbus
Savannah
including high levels of arsenic, boron, manganese,
Montgomery
inspected by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency
(EPA)
to date, and power plant owners admit engineers
Jackson
!
do not presently monitor 30 of the 48 dams.28
There are no regular reporting requirements after
construction, except for certificate renewal every five
Ken tucky: Snapshot of
Coal Ash Risks & Regulatio n
Number of
Coal Ash Ponds
years; and coal ash sites have been able to operate
!
with expired licenses. Historically, operators have not
Mobile
always been required
to provide financial assurances in
Tallahassee
48
Jacksonville
High-Hazard Sites
8
18
the event of a spill, potentially leaving Kentuckians on
the hook for the cost of cleanup. Kentucky regulation
does not require emergency action plans or inundation
New Orleans
maps (that show how the surrounding communities
would be affected by a dam breach). These represent
an incredible failure of oversight, especially given the
11
Documented Cases
or Spills
Clearwater
5
Orlando
!
Tampa
State Regu lation
PON DS
L a n d fil l s
None
None
None
None
Site Construction in Water Table
Prohibited
None
None
None
None
nickel, and sulfate. It is likely that contaminants are
Station in Harrodsburg, Kentucky and the risks local
present at many more sites but go undetected, because
families face from these ponds’ toxic contents. Given
the state does not require liners (that prevent leaching
the failure of state regulators — in Kentucky, and
of coal ash toxins into the ground) at all coal ash ponds
indeed across the United States — to create and
nor does the state prohibit dumping coal ash waste
enforce common-sense safeguards that would protect
directly into the water table [See Mill Creek: Disaster in
public health and waterways, it’s time for the U.S.
Slow Motion].29
Environmental Protection Agency to issue strong,
Toxic dust from coal ash landfills is also a public health
federally enforceable protections.
threat to communities near coal plants in Kentucky.
The LG&E Cane Run Generating Station near Louisville,
KY stores enormous mountains of coal ash on site.
For years, toxic dust clouds and odors have blown
from facility into the community next to the plant.
The Louisville Metro Air Pollution Control District has
repeatedly responded to the toxic dust with notices
of violations and fines, but residents continue to be
plagued by blowing ash.
M ill C r e e k :
D isast e r in S low M ot ion
Beginning in 2013, time-lapse photography from
a camera attached to a tree across the Ohio
River from Louisville Gas and Electric’s Mill Creek
Generating Station captured a year’s worth of
images showing dangerous coal ash wastewater
pouring unabated into the Ohio River. An unlined
Because Kentucky regulations do not require
waste pond storing toxic coal ash is the source of
groundwater monitoring at all coal ash dump sites,
the pollution.
Kentuckians are left in the dark about the full extent of
contamination and the risks they face but, according
to EPA calculations, coal ash landfills and ponds are
responsible for all land releases of arsenic, chromium,
and mercury in Kentucky.30
Because of lax regulation and poor oversight by the
state — including allowing virtually unlimited discharge
of toxic coal ash pollutants and allowing coal ash ponds
to operate under long-expired permits31 — Kentuckians
are put at significant risk from coal ash pollution.
As part of a national investigation, the following section
details the coal ash ponds at E.W. Brown Generating
The Mill Creek coal plant and its associated coal
ash pond are 500 feet from a large residential
development and 1,000 feet from a middle school.
Despite this close proximity; Kentucky law does
not require LG&E to test its coal ash wastewater for
toxic pollutants such as mercury.
“It’s devastating to think that this could have been
going on for more than 20 years. It’s like the North
Carolina or West Virginia spills but in slow motion,
with no one to stop it.”
— Sierra Club organizer Thomas Pearce,
who helped install the hidden camera.
12
Piling on a Problem: E.W. Brown’s Coal Ash
Pond & Proposed Landfill
The E.W. Brown Generating Station in Harrodsburg, Kentucky is a nearly
60-year-old coal-burning plant less than 30 miles from Lexington.32 Operated
by Kentucky Utilities and owned by Louisville Gas & Electric, the plant maintains a 126-acre main coal ash pond. The massive unlined pond, built with the
coal plant in 1957, was an unregulated dumping site for coal ash waste, which
is the by-product resulting from burning coal.33
Over the last few years, the pond has stopped receiving
highly permeable and vulnerable region, are
coal ash, but the site remains unlined and still contains
leaking contaminants into the surface and groundwater,
about 26 million tons of ash. The E.W. Brown plant and
threatening public health and violating state and
its coal ash ponds, located over an already fractured,
federal laws.34
13
Tests on the water show arsenic contamination at more
than 14 times the amount determined safe for Kentucky
E .W. Br ow n ’ s Coa l Ash Pon d
drinking water. About a dozen springs southeast of E.W.
Brown’s ponds are discharging contaminants into nearby
Number of Coal Ash Ponds
336
Total Known Capacity
Undetermined37
Hazard Level
High (2 ponds)
Known Groundwater
Contamination
Arsenic at more
than 14 times
safe level, boron,
mercury, and
selenium
Herrington Lake, which has shown unhealthy levels of
mercury. Further, two local springs contained boron
at levels exceeding the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency’s Health Advisory for Children. Herrington Lake
flows into the Kentucky River, one of the most polluted
waterways in the United States.35
Dam Safety Risks
The Kentucky Department for Environmental
Protection’s Division of Water has also deemed the
126-ft. pond dam a high hazard structure, meaning that
if it failed it would cause deaths and seriously damage
property and transportation routes. However, Kentucky
Utilities has failed to act on this looming threat.38
A Legacy of Contamination
Proposed Landfill
Both LG&E and Kentucky Utilities are owned by PP&L
Kentucky Utilities has proposed to construct a coal ash
landfill larger than 105 acres on top of the E.W. Brown’s
main coal ash pond.39 The long-term impacts of placing
a landfill on top of a coal ash pond are unknown, and
the design raises serious questions about long-term
stability and continued pollution from the site, especially
given the ongoing contamination of the groundwater.
The landfill could drive contaminants deeper into the
groundwater, making it more difficult to take action and
stop the problem.40
(Pennsylvania Power & Light), a large corporate offender
that is also responsible for coal ash pollution in Montana
at its Colstrip plant.42 Like E.W. Brown, the Colstrip
plant’s ponds and containment system have been
leaking for decades, contaminating the groundwater.
Also in Kentucky, a hidden camera operation revealed
that LG&E’s Mill Creek plant has been constantly
dumping coal ash wastewater into the Ohio River for a
year. Google Earth images also show many years worth
of snapshots that captured an outflow into the river.43
What’s at Stake?
The proposed landfill would pile tens of millions of tons
of coal ash on top of the leaking pond, which is less
than a quarter of a mile from vacation homes and other
residential neighborhoods surrounding the 2,300-acre
Herrington Lake.41 Built by Kentucky Utilities in 1925 as a
hydroelectric dam, the lake is now a major recreational
and fishing area, drawing families and vacationers
seeking to enjoy the marina views, local eateries,
boating, and other water sports.
14
Cedar Rapids
Omaha
Des Moines
!
!
!!
!
!
!
Peoria
! !
Lincoln
Springfield
Topeka
!
Kansas
City Independence
!
Overland Park
Jefferson City
! !!
Gary
!
Chicago
Naperville
Aurora
!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!
! Saint Louis
!
Ind
!
!
Louisvill
F
Evansville
Wichita
Springfield
Potential
Disasters
SPILL SITES
Nashvil
Tulsa
HIGH HAZARD
ma City
Coal ash
waste ponds
The Toxic Legacy of Coal Ash in Missouri !
Memphis
Only the largest, most dangerous of Missouri’s
32 coal ash ponds are
Little Rock
regulated for dam safety. Coal ash ponds with a whopping 170 million gallons
!
of capacity (enough to fill the entire National Mall in Washington D.C. with
Birmingham
two feet of coal ash sludge) go virtually unregulated.
!
Key safeguards to protect the public are absent in
Missouri. Regular state coal ash dam safety inspections
Carrollton Plano
are
not required, nor is groundwater monitoring or
Irving
Garland
liners at allDallas
coal ash ponds. Missouri regulations even fail
Fort Worth
Shreveport
to prohibit dumping directly into the water table. Half
ustin
!
!
!
of Missouri’s coal ash dams were not constructed by
professional engineers.
One of Missouri’s 39 coal ash pond dams is rated as
Waco
a “High” hazard by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), meaning that failure is likely to take
human lives, and five are rated as a “Significant” hazard,
meaning that failure would cause economic and/or
environmental damage. Six of Missouri’s coal ash ponds
also have an EPA Condition Assessment of “Poor,”
meaning that remedial action
is needed.
Jackson
!
Missouri is a coal-dependent state with especially lax
groundwater monitoring requirements at coal ash
ponds. Currently, the state’s Department of Natural
Mobile
15
Baton Rouge
Lafayette
Hu
State Regulation
PON DS
L a n d fil l s
None
None
Table Prohibited
None
None
None
None
Resources has not exercised its authority to collect
cleanup.44 The following section will detail the risks
groundwater monitoring data at many coal ash ponds.
posed by proposed coal ash landfills at the Labadie site
Without this vital information, local residents are kept
as well as two other Ameren plants, in particular at the
in the dark about the extent of potential drinking water
Meramec plant.
contamination and the serious health risks they face.
The state’s apparent disregard for major health and
Across state lines in Illinois, where Ameren has dumped
safety concerns from massive coal ash dump sites and
coal ash in ponds for decades, monitoring required by
dams across the state is part and parcel of why we need
the state revealed widespread contamination. There
strong, federally enforceable safeguards from coal ash
is no distinguishable difference in the type of coal ash
pollution — for Missourians and all Americans.
ponds operated in Missouri and those in Illinois, but the
lack of contamination data in Missouri puts Missourians
in relatively greater danger.
The Missouri Department of Natural Resources (DNR)
knew as early as 1992 that a 154-acre, unlined coal ash
M issour i: S n a p shot of
Number of
Coal Ash Ponds
39
pond at Ameren’s Labadie plant — the largest coal plant
in the state and the 14th largest in the nation — had
been leaking some 50,000 gallons of coal ash waste
per day. It’s believed the leaks went on for about two
decades before media attention and public pressure
High-Hazard Sites
1
5
Documented Cases
or Spills
4
triggered Ameren to take steps to address them.
Ameren has not stopped the leaking of toxic coal ash at
the source but has taken steps to reduce contamination
into the environment.
The DNR has not required groundwater monitoring
or cleanup, despite the threat to the local population
that relies on groundwater for drinking water and
agricultural use. The DNR also allowed the plant to
continue operating under a 1994 permit, which should
have expired in 1999, without issuing an updated
renewal permit to require groundwater monitoring and
16
Coal Ash at the Meramec Coal Plant
For the past 60 years, utility giant Ameren has dumped coal ash into unlined
ponds at the Labadie, Meramec, Rush Island, and Portage Des Sioux coalburning power plants located throughout the St. Louis metropolitan area.
Ameren Corporation is heavily dependent on coal, drawing approximately 80
percent of its power from burning the dirty fossil fuel.
Today, Ameren is seeking approval from the Missouri
of the Meramec and Mississippi Rivers is particularly
Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to build new
alarming for area residents. Ameren began dumping coal
coal ash landfills at the Labadie, Meramec and Rush
ash into unlined ash ponds at the Meramec plant in St.
Island power plants. All are located in the floodplains
Louis County in 1953. Since then, Ameren has used ten
of the Missouri, Mississippi and Meramec Rivers. The
different ash ponds at the site.45 Of the six ash ponds
coal ash landfills at the Meramec and Rush Island plants
would be built on top of unlined coal ash ponds where at
least one instance of leaking coal ash toxins has already
been confirmed. This risky — and unprecedented in
Missouri — approach to coal ash disposal raises serious
questions and concerns for the affected communities as
well as families across Missouri.
The proposal to build a risky new landfill at the aging
Meramec coal-fired power plant on the confluence
17
“We know that Ameren knows how
to look for contamination, and
when they look for it they usually
find it.”
—Maxine Lipeles, co-director of the
Interdisciplinary Environmental Clinic at Washington
University School of Law51
remaining in active use, four are unlined and three date
to the 1950s. In 2012, the U.S. Environmental Protection
T he M e r a m e c Coa l Ash Po nds
Agency (EPA) inspected the Meramec plant’s six active
ponds for structural stability and rated them all as
“poor.”
46
Ash pond safety risks
DNR has said that it intends to include groundwater
monitoring requirements if and when it updates the
Number of Coal
Ash Ponds
Total Known
Capacity
267,000,000 gallons47
Hazard Level
Low
EPA Condition
Assessment
Poor
Known
Groundwater
Contamination
High levels of iron, boron,
and manganese (1988).
Current levels unknown due
to lack of DNR groundwater
monitoring
expired water pollution discharge (NPDES) permits for
the Labadie, Meramec, and Rush Island plants. Yet these
permits are long expired — the Labadie plant expired in
1999, Meramec in 2005, and Rush Island in 2009 — and
DNR’s efforts to issue renewal permits have repeatedly
faltered.
An Ameren report shows that the company found
10
groundwater contamination at the Meramec site in
1988. Ameren’s tests detected pollutants associated
with coal ash,48 including iron, boron, and manganese
in concentrations that exceeded state limits for
groundwater safety. Ameren’s contractor even
acknowledged that elevated levels of boron indicated
that coal ash was leaking from the ponds.49 This
contamination was associated with one of the two
ash ponds above which Ameren now proposes to
build a coal ash landfill. While that ash pond is now
apparently lined, there is no indication that any of the
contamination has been cleaned up. Four of the six
active ash ponds at the Meramec sites — including
the other pond above which Ameren seeks to build its
proposed coal ash landfill — are unlined.50
The Push for Water Protections in
Missouri Continues
The fate of Ameren’s risky plans to build coal ash
landfills on top of already-leaking, outdated ponds rests
in the hands of the Missouri DNR. The agency can and
should require groundwater monitoring and establish
the structural integrity of the underlying ponds before
Dedicated St. Louis residents have fought the risky
proposed landfills for years, voicing concerns for the
safety of their own groundwater wells that are likely
to be contaminated by Ameren’s coal ash leakage. In
2013, the Sierra Club and the Labadie Environmental
Organization called on DNR to immediately require
comprehensive groundwater monitoring of known and
likely contamination at Ameren’s Labadie, Meramec, and
Rush Island coal-fired power plants.52 In early 2014, the
groups brought their concerns to Governor Jay Nixon,
calling for a halt to all proposed coal ash landfill permits
until comprehensive groundwater monitoring has been
conducted at all existing coal ash ponds.
Missouri residents will continue to fight for even the
most basic information and protection of their health
and waterways from coal ash pollution. The longstanding serious concerns raised by Missourians and
communities across the country who are put at risk
by toxic coal ash show the need for strong, federally
enforceable protections.
Ameren can take steps to build these landfills. Ameren
recently began voluntary groundwater monitoring at
Rush Island, in order to develop a closure plan for the
ash pond as part of its landfill proposal. DNR has asked
for, but not yet received (as of May 2014) the results of
the first quarterly groundwater sampling.
18
Helena
!
oise
Potential
Disasters
SPILL SITES
HIGH HAZARD
Coal ash
waste ponds
!
The Toxic Legacy of Coal Ash in Montana:
Montana’s coal ash ponds operate without sufficient safeguards and little or
no oversight to ensure the health and safety of Montanans are protected. In
2003, the state’s already weak standards for coal ash safety were removed
entirely
for
new
Salt
Lake
Citycoal plants when Montana exempted coal-fired power plants
from its Major Facility Siting Act (MFSA).
Cheyenne
Even Montana’s Department of Environmental Quality
Provo
admits that this absolute lack of coal ash protections for
the state level. Montana has no requirements for liners,
Fort Collins
groundwater monitoring, preventing leaching of toxic
future plants is “no longer appropriate.” Yet attempts
waste, financial assurance or clean up at any new coal
to bring coal ash back under the most basic program of
ash sites and very limited authority at existing sites like
monitoring and safety standards have failed thus far at
Colstrip. The Colstrip power plant in Rosebud County is
Aurora
Lakewood Denver
19
Colorado Springs
State Re gu lation
PON DS
L a n d fil l s
for All New Sites
None
None
None
None
Table Prohibited
None
None
None
None
the site of most of the coal ash ponds in the state. These
ponds are known to have been leaking almost since their
inception. The details of the contamination of drinking
water of the town of Colstrip and the subsequent legal
settlements will be detailed in the following section.
M on ta n a : S n a p shot of
Number of
Coal Ash Ponds
17
Contamination from coal ash sickened residents and
continues to pollute ground and surface water near the
plant.53
High-Hazard Sites
1
3
Documented Cases
or Spills
6
20
An Untold Catastrophe:
The Colstrip coal plant in Montana
For decades, the Colstrip coal plant in Colstrip, Montana has been leaking
toxic coal ash waste into precious groundwater resources in dry Rosebud
County, Montana. Local ranchers, whose families have been in Rosebud
County since the 1800s, are dependent upon groundwater to sustain their
cattle ranches, as Colstrip gets as little as 13 inches of rain a year.
The biggest individual owner of the Colstrip coal plant
After nearly 40 years of plant operations, the Colstrip
is Puget Sound Energy, the largest electric utility in
coal plant now has over 800 acres of waste ponds
Washington State. The second largest owner and
that contain toxic pollutants like boron and arsenic.54
operator of the plant is Pennsylvania- based PPL,
The waste ponds collectively leak over 360 gallons per
headquartered in Allentown, Pennsylvania. In addition to
minute of contaminated effluent into the underlying
the Colstrip coal plant, PPL also owns Louisville Gas &
groundwater.55 Due to contamination originating from
Electric, which operates the Mill Creek coal plant in Mill
the Colstrip site, the owners of the plant had to pay
Creek, Kentucky that was recently exposed for releasing
a $25 million settlement to neighbors and ranchers
nearly unlimited amounts of toxic coal ash waste water
for contamination of their drinking water in 2008.56
into the Ohio River. PPL is establishing a pattern of
Additionally, the City of Colstrip has to pipe in fresh
allowing toxic coal ash waste into essential water bodies.
water from miles away and operate a separate drinking
The other Colstrip owners include: Avista Utilities in
water system to ensure local residents are assured of the
Spokane, Washington and Northern Idaho; Portland
basic right to safe drinking water.57 Aerial photographs
General Electric in Portland, Oregon; NorthWestern
and maps provided by the coal plant owners document
Energy, the largest electric utility in Montana; and
that the plume of pollution has spread below the town
PacifiCorp, one of the largest utilities in the country.
of Colstrip.58
21
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has identified
are designed to sustain water use in the very arid
some of the Colstrip dams that hold back the toxic
environment of Eastern Montana, where groundwater is
waste ponds as “high hazard dams.”
59
According to the
Environmental Protection Agency, a “high hazard dam”
is one in which a “failure or mis-operation will probably
cause loss of human life.”60 These dams should be
evaluated by a government agency to ensure they are
not at risk of breaching, and thereby causing yet another
coal ash disaster. Yet no government agency has ever
inspected these dams.
like gold.
This untold Colstrip disaster is another sad legacy in
Montana’s history of out-of-state corporations coming
into Montana, stripping away the natural resources, and
leaving a toxic site behind. The chemical conglomerate
WR Grace, the Zortman-Landusky gold mine, the
multinational ARCO and its Berkeley Pit have spoiled
Montana with some of the nation’s worst and most-
While the Colstrip plant was originally intended to
expensive toxic waste sites. Montanans are slowly and
utilize a “closed loop” system for its waste, meaning
reluctantly waking up to the fact that Colstrip may be
that any wastewater generated by the plant should
Montana’s next catastrophe.
stay within the plant compound, this is not the case.
PPL tries to characterize their system as “closed loop”
because they simply re-define containment. In a feeble
attempt to control the spreading contamination, PPL
has set up a system of pollution monitoring wells
outside the suspected area of groundwater pollution.
If these monitoring wells detect pollution, the plant
PPL’s coal-ash system is not working. Colstrip does
not need one of PPL’s high hazard dams to break for a
catastrophe to occur. It is happening now, and has been
going on for decades. Montanans and all Americans
need strong, federally enforceable protections from the
serious dangers posed by coal ash.
operator attempts to stop the spread of the pollution
by converting the monitoring wells to pump-back
T he Colst r ip Coa l Ash Po nds
wells, where they simply pump the contaminated
water back into the central waste ponds. The owners
are now operating approximately 188 pump-back
wells. Essentially, what PPL is doing is moving the goal
posts. As soon as more contamination shows up on
Number of Coal
Ash Ponds
9
Total Known
Capacity
Unknown
Hazard Level
High
the perimeter, they move out the perimeter, thereby
redefining containment.
This is similar to PPL’s bending of the law in Kentucky.
PPL’s current permit at the Mill Creek plant allows it to
“occasionally” discharge its waste water into the Ohio.
Known
Groundwater
Contamination
boron, sulfate, heavy metals
PPL has simply defined “occasional” to mean every day.
PPL is establishing a pattern of distorting the law to
avoid being responsible for its toxic pollution.
While water users in Montana must limit their well
water withdrawals to 35 gallons per minute or 10 acrefeet annually, PPL is now pumping back nearly 1000
gallons per minute of groundwater into the waste water
impoundments.61 Collectively and often individually,
Colstrip’s monitoring wells far exceed legally acceptable
levels of water withdrawals. Yet Colstrip is currently
avoiding having to obtain essential water rights that
22
!
!!
!! Cincinnati
!
e
rankfort
Alexandria
!
!!
!
Charleston
!! Lexington
Richmond
!
!
!
!
Knoxville
!
!!
!
Charlotte
!
!
!
Raleigh
!
Potential
Disasters
SPILL SITES
!
!
Augusta
Durham
!
Columbia
Atlanta
!
!
!!
Chattanooga
tsville
!
Greensboro
Winston-Salem
e
!
!
Hampton
Newport News
Virginia Beach
Norfolk
Chesapeake
!
! !!
!
HIGH HAZARD
Coal ash
waste ponds
The ToxicMacon
Legacy of Coal Ash
in North Carolina
Columbus
Savannah
Power plants
Montgomery
in North Carolina create an enormous amount of coal ash—5.5
million tons annually. The state is among the top-ten largest producers of coal
ash in the nation, playing host to 26 enormous coal ash dams. The average
coal ash dam in North Carolina is over six stories tall (62 feet) and can store
nearly 65,000 acre-feet—the equivalent of 32,000 Olympic-sized swimming
Jacksonville
pools—of toxic
coal
sludge.
Tallahassee
!
Dam safety, however, appears to be a low priority for
When millions of gallons of coal ash sludge and
North Carolina regulators. State law does not require
contaminated water spilled into the Dan River in
operators to submit regular reports, nor does it ensure
February 2014, it was not the first time that North
that the public is free from financial responsibility if a
Carolinians faced toxic dangers from coal ash at the
dam fails. So lax are the protections that North Carolina
hands of Duke Energy, which owns and operates 14 coal
created loopholes for operators of coal ash dams to
Orlando
avoid submitting emergency action plans in case of a
plants in the state. Duke Energy has previously been
catastrophic failure.
Island Lake, which is the drinking water source for
Clearwater
23
!
Saint Petersburg
responsible for coal ash contamination of Mountain
more than over 800,000 people in the Charlotte area.
Tampa
State Regu lation
PON DS
L a n d fil l s
None
None
Liners Required for New Sites*
Table Prohibited
None
*No new coal ash pond sites are anticipated.
Table citation - http://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/nc-coal-ash-factsheet-1112.pdf
and http://www.epa.gov/osw/nonhaz/industrial/special/fossil/surveys2/index.htm
Meanwhile, Duke Energy’s coal ash pollution in Sutton
Press public records inquiry, North Carolina regulators
Lake is estimated to kill more than 900,000 fish every
cited five more Duke Energy power plants for lacking
year.
62
In Asheville, where local activists are calling
required storm water permits: Belews Creek Steam
for the retirement of the Asheville coal plant, old coal
Station, Cliffside Steam Station, Lee Steam Electric Plant,
ash ponds are known to leach toxic chemicals into
Roxboro Steam Electric Power Plant, and Sutton Steam
groundwater and the French Broad River.
Electric Plant.
Duke Energy and North Carolina’s Department of
State regulators and Duke Energy are finally beginning
Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) have known
to move reluctantly toward implementing a modicum
about contamination and dangerous coal ash storage
of protection and transparency —but neither goes
pits for years. Yet neither Duke Energy nor the state
far enough to provide the safeguards that all North
took action to clean up the waste pits and protect state
Carolinians deserve when it comes to clean drinking
waterways or residents, until concerned local activists
water and the health of their families. Still, without
began calling for transparency and clean up.63
strong, enforceable federal protections, North Carolina’s
In addition, recent reports have shed light on just how
far North Carolina Governor Pat McCrory (a former Duke
Energy employee) and DENR have gone to protect
the interests of Duke Energy. This includes initiating
waterways and communities remain at risk from toxic
coal ash pollution.
N ort h C a r olin a : S n a p shot o f
lawsuits against Duke Energy for coal ash pollution in
order to block actions by environmental groups and
then attempting to quickly settle those cases with small
Number of
Coal Ash Ponds
37 at
14 sites
fines that amount to a pittance for the energy giant,
while shielding Duke Energy from full public disclosure
of wrong-doing.64 A federal criminal grand jury is now
investigating how Duke Energy and the State have
handled coal ash.
Since the Dan River spill, state regulators and Duke
Energy have come under enormous scrutiny and are
beginning to change their tune. In fact, one month
High-Hazard Sites
29
2
Documented Cases
or Spills
All 14 sites
(plants)
after the disaster and just days after an Associated
24
The Asheville Coal Ash Lagoons
In October 2012, conservation groups filed suit to protect North Carolina
communities from toxic groundwater contamination at 14 coal-fired
power plants with outdated, unlined coal ash ponds. The lawsuit sought
the enforcement of state law that requires industrial polluters to stop
groundwater contamination and cleanup existing pollution. In January 2013,
conservation groups in North Carolina issued the first of several Notices of
Intent that they would sue Duke Energy under federal law to protect
North Carolina communities from unlawful pollution at Duke’s outdated,
unlined coal ash ponds.
Today, local communities are still waiting for justice
is odorless and nearly tasteless, making it difficult to
and for Duke Energy to clean up these sites, among the
detect and identify. Exposure to selenium can cause
most important of which is the Asheville Plant coal ash
illness, neurological damage, and even death; it is also
lagoons in Arden, NC, just minutes from Asheville and
extremely toxic to fish at low doses.
Lake Julian, along the French Broad River.
The Asheville coal ash lagoons include two massive coal
The Anchor of Western North Carolina’s
Tourist Economy
ash dams, each roughly the height of an eight-story
The French Broad River, which cuts through the heart of
building with the capacity to hold nearly half a billion
Asheville and offers world-class outdoor recreation, is
gallons of toxic coal ash sludge. In July 2012, Duke
one of North Carolina’s most iconic landmarks. Asheville
Energy acquired the Asheville Plant and its coal ash
and its river are also the anchor of the tourist economy
ponds in a merger with Progress Energy.
of western North Carolina.
Groundwater monitoring at the site shows persistent
Tourism dollars and jobs are incredibly important to
contamination that exceeded state limits. Among the
the local economy. Asheville’s leisure and hospitality
contaminants are thallium and selenium. Thallium is a
sector topped all other sectors in terms of job growth
poison and suspected carcinogen that is highly water-
(8.9 percent) between 2012 and 2013, helping the metro
soluble and can enter the body through the skin. It
region significantly outpace both the state and the
65
25
“The French Broad River is a world
class recreation destination, and we
no longer want to see it used as a
dumping ground for toxic coal ash.”
—Hartwell Carson of the French Broad Riverkeepers
nation in job growth for the 12-month period.
68
In 2012,
storage of coal ash. Community leaders and activists
have applauded the news, but remain committed to
holding Duke Energy and state regulators accountable
for an end to coal ash pollution and a full cleanup at
sites across the state.70
Both the dangers posed by the Asheville coal ash
lagoons and the difficulties local residents have faced in
ending water contamination at the site and protecting
tourists spent $834 million in Buncombe County, of
their families highlight the need for strong, enforceable
which Asheville is the county seat; tourism brought in
federal safeguards for communities like Asheville against
nearly $80 million in local and state tax receipts.
coal ash pollution.
69
The Asheville coal ash lagoons, which visibly loom above
I-26 and the French Broad River, are both rated “high
hazard” and in the event of a dam breach, would almost
certainly result in loss of human life and a permanently
T he Ashe v ille Coa l Ash L ag o o ns
altered landscape and economy for the area.
Number of
Coal Ash Ponds
The struggle to protect North Carolinians
continues
Total Known
Capacity
906,000,000 gallons*
Hazard Level
High
2
The battle to hold Duke Energy accountable through the
courts seemed all but over after DENR inserted itself, in
what many believe was an attempt to block citizen suits.
DENR quickly proposed a settlement to the suit that
would allow Duke Energy to pay a miniscule fine and not
require the company to clean up the site.
Known
Groundwater
Contamination
High levels of boron, chloride,
chromium, iron, manganese,
selenium, thallium, arsenic,
lead, and pH
The Southern Environmental Law Center, on behalf of
Sierra Club, Waterkeeper Alliance, and Western North
Carolina Alliance, pushed back and won the right for
its clients to intervene in the litigation and protest the
state’s sweetheart deal with Duke Energy.
In a separate action on behalf of the same groups
as well as Cape Fear River Watch, on March 6, 2014,
a Wake County Judge ruled that Duke Energy must
Dam Safety
Risks
take immediate action to eliminate the sources of
groundwater contamination that are currently violating
water quality standards at all 14 of its coal-fired power
plants in the state. Even after the massive Dan River coal
ash spill, however, Duke Energy immediately appealed
the decision and filed a motion to stay the ruling.
Both of the site’s coal ash
dams are unlined, allowing
coal ash toxins to leach into
groundwater. In 2010, the older
dam (constructed in 1964)
was also found to be in “poor”
safety rating by structural
engineers.66 In 2012, the
newer of Duke’s two coal ash
lagoons at Asheville suffered
a major breach at an internal
dike, causing a 60 foot by 25
foot blowout. Fortunately,
the breach did not result in
a release of coal ash, but
Duke had to dewater the coal
ash lagoon immediately and
conduct emergency repairs.67
Ironically, the State also appealed the ruling, insisting
that it did not have the authority to require Duke to
“take immediate action.”
Duke Energy recently signaled that it is considering
phasing out coal power generation at the Asheville
Plant, as well as moving away from dangerous wet
What’s at
Stake?
The French Broad River cuts
through the heart of Asheville
and is a world-class tourism
destination, bringing nearly
$1 billion dollars to the area
each year.
*http://www.southeastcoalash.org
26
The Cape Fear Coal Ash Lagoons
The Dan River coal ash spill drew North Carolinians’ attention to dangerous
and outdated coal ash ponds and dams across the state, but the outdated
infrastructure is not the only threat North Carolina’s rivers, lakes, and streams
face. Just weeks after the Dan River spill, clean water advocates discovered
that Duke Energy improperly pumped more than 60 million gallons of
untreated coal ash waste water directly from its ponds into the Cape Fear
River, threatening drinking water safety, agriculture, and wildlife.
Duke Energy’s Cape Fear coal-fired power plant and its
it has cracked three times. Two of these cracks were
five coal ash lagoons and dams sits alongside the Cape
identified in the EPA engineering report and the third
Fear River near Moncure, NC. The plant, originally built
crack was identified by investigations in 2014. This 2014
in 1923, was retired in 2012, yet its coal ash dams, built
investigation, conducted by experts from Waterkeeper
over the course of six decades, are arguably the most
Alliance and Cape Fear Riverkeeper, revealed that Duke
dangerous in the state.
Energy was intentionally pumping more than 60 million
Investigations conducted by the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as well as
Waterkeeper Alliance and Cape Fear Riverkeeper have
uncovered serious safety issues with the lagoons and
dams, as well as unauthorized leaks from the toxic
gallons of untreated, concentrated coal ash wastewater
out of the bottom of two of the ponds.72,73 According to
this same investigation, during the pumping the 1985
pond developed the third crack, more than 30 feet long
and four inches wide.
lagoons into groundwater and the Cape Fear River.
The Cape Fear coal ash ponds sit just a few short miles
According to the EPA report , all five ponds and dams
upstream of where the communities of Sanford, Dunn
are rated “in poor condition” because they were not
and parts of Harnett county draw their drinking water
built up to the recommended safety standards. EPA
from the Cape Fear River. Further downstream, the
investigators classified the Cape Fear coal ash ponds
cities of Fayetteville, Fort Bragg and Wilmington also
and dams as more dangerous than even the Dan River
pull drinking water from the river. If any of the dams
ponds, one of which failed in February 2014.
or ponds failed and a spill occurred, drinking water
71
The coal ash dam built in 1985 is particularly unsafe;
27
resources for more than a half million people in the
region would be threatened. (431)
“Even after the Dan River spill, Duke
Energy chose to pump more than
sixty million gallons of toxic coal
ash wastewater into the Cape
Fear River. This river gives us our
drinking water. This river is a part
of our heritage. We can’t let Duke
Energy ruin that.”
The struggle to protect North Carolinians
continues
— Kemp Burdette, Executive director, Cape Fear Riverkeeper
North Carolina Alliance, pushed back and won the right
The battle to hold Duke Energy accountable through the
courts seemed all but over after DENR inserted itself, in
what many believe was an attempt to block citizen suits.
DENR quickly proposed a settlement to the suit that
would allow Duke Energy to pay a miniscule fine and not
require the company to clean up the site.
The Southern Environmental Law Center, on behalf of
the Sierra Club, Waterkeeper Alliance, and Western
for its clients to intervene in the litigation and protest
Dam safety risks: Recent investigation and sampling
the state’s sweetheart deal with Duke Energy.
conducted by Waterkeeper Alliance and Cape Fear
In a separate action on behalf of the same groups
Riverkeeper on March 13, 2014 confirms that the
as well as Cape Fear River Watch, on March 6, 2014,
Cape Fear dams are leaking in numerous places. The
a Wake County Judge ruled that Duke Energy must
pollutants leaking into the Cape Fear River and the canal
take immediate action to eliminate the sources of
between the coal ash ponds include aluminum, arsenic,
groundwater contamination that are currently violating
boron, chromium, lead, manganese, nickel and zinc.
water quality standards at all 14 of its coal-fired power
What’s at stake? The communities of Sanford, Dunn,
Harnett County, Fayetteville, Fort Bragg and Wilmington
draw drinking water from the Cape Fear River
downstream of the coal ash ponds and dams. In the
case of a spill, drinking water resources for more than
half a million people in Eastern North Carolina would be
threatened.
The Cape Fear River is one of the longest rivers in North
Carolina with the largest watershed basin in the state,
running from the confluence of the Deep and Haw Rivers
near Haywood, NC, all the way to Wilmington, one of
North Carolina’s most important coastal cities. The Cape
Fear River is the only major river in North Carolina that
flows into the Atlantic Ocean, opening into an estuary
at Cape Fear and is part of the Intracoastal Waterway
system.
“The [pumping] incident shows the importance of
citizen involvement,” said Frank Holleman, senior
plants in the state. Even after the massive Dan River coal
ash spill, however, Duke Energy immediately appealed
the decision and filed a motion to stay the ruling.
Ironically, the State also appealed the ruling, insisting
that it did not have the authority to require Duke to
“take immediate action.”
Both the dangers posed by the Cape Fear coal ash
lagoons and the difficulties advocates have faced in
ending water contamination at the site and protecting
their families highlight the need for strong, enforceable
federal safeguards for communities in Eastern North
Carolina against coal ash pollution. (256)
T he C a p e F e a r Coa l Ash L ag o o ns
Number of
Coal Ash Ponds
5
Total Known
Capacity
953,000,000 gallons
Hazard Level
Significant
attorney for the Southern Environmental Law Center.
“Had the Waterkeeper Alliance not been inspecting
that site, it’s likely that no one would have known it was
happening, or DENR would not have found it until later
and even more contaminated water might have been
pumped into the river.”
Known
Groundwater
Contamination
Levels of lead, boron,
chromium, iron, manganese
and sulfate exceed NC
groundwater standards74
28
Pueblo
!
!!
Santa Fe
Albuquerque
Amarillo
ottsdale
esa
andler
Lubbock
Tucson
!!
!!!
El Paso
Potential
Disasters
A
SPILL SITES
HIGH HAZARD
Coal ash
waste ponds
The Toxic Legacy of Coal Ash in New Mexico
Coal-fired power plants in New Mexico generate 3.6 million tons of coal
ash each year. New Mexico has 28 coal ash ponds at three plants, covering
more than 165 acres of land. Three of these coal ash ponds have been rated
“significant hazard.” Many of the ponds are unlined or inadequately lined to
prevent the release of contamination. The state of New Mexico requires no
groundwater monitoring or financial assurances for coal ash dams.75
San
L
29
State Regu lation
PON DS
L a n d fill s
Groundwater Monitoring
Required for All New and
Existing Sites
None
None
None
None
Table Prohibited
None
None
None
None
N ew Mexi co : Snaps hot of
Coa l Ash Ri sks & Regulation
Number of
Coal Ash Ponds
28
High-Hazard Sites
0
2
Documented Cases
or Spills
2*
*San Juan Generating Plant and Four Corners Plant
Multiple studies by Earthjustice found that groundwater
and surface water near the Four Corners site contained
high levels of numerous toxic chemicals (including
concentrations of boron nearly twelve times higher than
those found upstream) that could only reasonably be
attributed to coal ash contamination.76
30
Four Corners Power Station
In the Four Corners region of New Mexico, Colorado, Arizona and Utah, the
largest tribal reservation in the United States — belonging to the Navajo
Nation — spans an expanse roughly the size of West Virginia. In the very
northwest corner of New Mexico on the Navajo reservation lies the aging Four
Corners Power Plant and a very large coal mine that produces over 7 million
tons of coal each year.
In 1963, the Arizona Public Service (APS) entered into
massive amounts of coal and electricity are produced
an agreement with the Navajo Nation to lease part
right on Navajo land, an estimated 16,000 Navajo
of their land for the construction of the Four Corners
families are without access to electricity.79 The Navajo
Power Plant, located near Fruitland, New Mexico. Until
population is left without electricity and is instead
December 2013, the plant consisted of five units that
burdened by the enormous pollution created by coal-
generated 2,040 megawatts of power using coal
fired electricity generation.
77
supplied from the nearby BHP Billiton mine. In 1971, this
mine also became the dumping grounds for coal’s toxic
byproduct, known as coal combustion waste or, more
simply, coal ash. Since 1962, approximately 30 million of
tons of coal ash from the plant have also been dumped
in six (lined and unlined) inactive and active ponds near
the power plant.
For nearly forty years coal ash from the Four Corners
Power Plant was sent back to the mine and dumped into
empty, mined out “disposal” pits that have no protective
linings or barriers between the soil and the toxic coal
ash. As of 2000, APS had disposed of between 50 and
55 million tons of coal ash waste from the Four Corners
plant in the BHP Mine, covering approximately 230 acres
The Four Corners Plant is one of the largest in the West
of land. Since 2007, APS has disposed of ash in two
and sends most of the power it generates elsewhere —
large lined landfills near the plant. The larger of the two
in fact the second largest stakeholder at the plant is the
landfills rises 110 feet above natural grade.
Los Angeles Department of Water and Power. While
78
31
Today, there is no federal regulation of coal ash, and
mandate regulating coal ash at Four Corners, the health
APS has gone far too long without providing monitoring
and safety of downstream communities and nearby
data and information about how the toxic ash is being
Navajo residents remain at risk. People who live near
stored at both the mine and at the plant itself. Without
an unlined coal ash pond where ash is co-disposed
this critical information, the impacts of decades of toxic
with coal refuse and whose drinking water source is
coal ash pollution on the environment and public health
groundwater have a 1 in 50 chance of getting cancer
remain unknown. For many, the failure to protect local
from water contaminated by arsenic— a risk 2,000 times
communities from coal ash is an environmental justice
greater than the EPA’s goal for reducing cancer risk to
issue, as local activists seek answers to why swirling
1 in 100,000.82 It should come as no surprise that many
black dust stains livestock and clothing on windy days.
Dine’ people suffer from chronic illness. These coal ash
Without access to information relating to coal ash,
sites are neighbors to large numbers of Navajo people,
communities have been left with virtually no safeguards.
putting their health and welfare in danger. Without
In 2007, available surface water data were analyzed to
determine the impact of the Four Corners Plant’s coal
ash ponds on water quality in the Chaco River, which lies
health insurance, many Navajo people rely solely on
Indian Health Services for health care at facilities across
the Navajo Nation.83
just 50 feet from some of the ponds and flows directly
Additionally, Navajo people use their local environment
into the San Juan River Basin. The analysis found levels
to gather medicines for ceremony and wellness.
of boron, copper, lead, mercury and zinc in the water
According to the Dine’ Citizens Against Ruining the
downstream from the coal ash ponds at levels harmful
Environment, contamination from coal ash jeopardizes
to livestock, aquatic organisms, and human health.
80
In
the Navajo people’s ability of to practice traditional
fact, lead concentrations downstream from the plant’s
healings, which is embedded in their culture. Coal ash
coal ash ponds are almost 50 times higher than the
from the Four Corner Power Plant infringes on the ability
recommended standards to protect aquatic life. The only
to practice traditional living and ceremony.
logical source for these high levels of toxins is the coal
ash ponds that sit nearby.
It is clear the population bearing the biggest burden
of the coal ash pollution at the Four Corners Plant and
For decades, testing was also conducted on the Chaco
Navajo Mine are the many families living on the Navajo
River both upstream and downstream from the coal ash
reservation. The overwhelming evidence of coal ash
disposal area in the Navajo Mine. The results indicated
contamination from the Four Corners Power Plant
that coal ash contamination was reaching the river, and
and the lack of oversight and action from regulators
the degradation of water quality was alarming. Amounts
illustrates the need for strong, federally enforceable
of selenium downstream were nearly three times higher
protections from coal ash pollution for communities
than upstream of the mine. For boron, the concentration
across the country, and for the Navajo people.
was twelve times higher. While the Chaco Wash is
81
not currently designated as a source of drinking water,
the water may be used for domestic purposes and for
watering livestock. The increased downstream average
boron levels are more than four times the New Mexico
standard for drinking water. In addition, these levels are
high enough to harm aquatic freshwater organisms in
the river. Average downstream sulfate concentrations
were more than four times the secondary drinking
water standard and more than twice EPA‘s health-based
drinking water advisory for sulfate.
While testing on the Chaco River has shown dangerous
levels of toxic coal ash contaminants, without a federal
Four Cor n e r s Pow e r Stat i o n
Number of Coal
Ash Ponds
6 (both inactive and active)
Total Known
Capacity
973,000,000 gallons*
Hazard Level
Significant
Known
Groundwater
Contamination
High levels of copper, lead,
zinc, boron, and mercury
*http://www.epa.gov/osw/nonhaz/industrial/special/fossil/surveys/aps2.pdf
32
!
Toledo
Cleveland
Allentown
!
!!!
!
Pittsburgh !
!
!
!
!
! Columbus !
!
! !!
Akron
Fort Wayne
Dayton
dianapolis
!!
!
! Cincinnati
!
!!
!
!!
le
!!
Frankfort
!! Lexington
Philadelphia
Baltimore
Arlington
Alexandria
!
Charleston
Richmond
!
!
Greensboro
Winston-Salem
Knoxville
!
!
!
!
!
Potential
Chattanooga
Disasters
untsville
Dover
! Annapolis
!
!
!!
Hampton
Newport News
Virginia Beach
Norfolk
Chesapeake
lle
!
New York
Trenton
Harrisburg
!
! !!
Newark
Elizabeth
!!
Charlotte
!
!
SPILL SITES
Columbia
HIGH HAZARD
!
!
Durham
Raleigh
!
!
Coal ash
waste ponds
!
!
!
The Toxic Legacy
of Coal Ash in Virginia
Atlanta
Augusta
Virginia’s 16 (retired
and currently operational) coal-fired power plants have
Macon
created a substantial toxic legacy in the Commonwealth in the form of coal
ash contamination.
This includes at least two federal Superfund sites in
Columbus
Savannah
Virginia,
one
of
which
had
the
dubious
distinction of inclusion on the National
Montgomery
Priority List of the nation’s most contaminated Superfund sites, and four
other sites where coal ash contaminated groundwater or caused extensive
ecological damage.84
!
33
Tallahassee
Jacksonville
Stat e R e gul atio n
PON DS
Landfills
None
None
None
None
Table Prohibited
None
None
None
None
Despite its history of coal ash contamination, the Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality (VDEQ) does not
require liners or groundwater monitoring at every coal
ash site. And, while Virginia’s coal ash dams are among
the oldest (with an average age of over 40 years),
V ir gin ia : S n a p shot of
Number of
Coal Ash Ponds
25
state regulations do not require state inspection of coal
ash dams or adequate reporting on dam condition by
owners. Virginia also does not require owners to provide
financial assurances, consequently taxpayers may be
stuck with a hefty bill for clean up in the event of a coal
ash spill.
85
The coal ash pond at Dominion Energy’s Chesapeake
Energy Center in the Tidewater area is profiled in the
following section as part of a national investigation by
Sierra Club into the serious risks to public health posed
by coal ash. The pond at the site is unlined, has been
rated significant hazard, and was given a rating of “poor”
for its structural integrity by EPA.86
Significant-Hazard Sites
8
Significant-Hazard Sites
rated “Poor” by EPA
2*
Documented Cases
or Spills
6**
*AEP Clinch River Power Plant, Carbo, VA: Dominion Energy Chesapeake
Energy Center, Chesapeake, VA
**Coal ash contamination has generated at least two federal
Superfund sites in Virginia, including one on the National Priority List
of the nation’s most contaminated Superfund sites.
34
Dominion’s Chesapeake Energy Center
The bottom ash and sediment coal ash pond at Dominion’s Chesapeake
Energy Center was found to have contaminated groundwater with arsenic as
high as 30 times the drinking water standard for almost a decade. The power
plant’s clay-lined coal ash landfill also required corrective action to address
groundwater contamination with arsenic, sulfides and vanadium in 2001.87
As Dominion looks to retire its Chesapeake Energy
In fact, the risk may be greater, as less oversight by
Center in the coming months, serious concerns remain
operators means old dams and other infrastructure can
about the fate of the plant’s notorious coal ash ponds.
leak and weaken without being noticed.
As the recent Dan River spill in North Carolina shows,
toxic sludge from a retired coal ash ponds (See Section:
The Dan River Spill), known as “legacy ponds,” pose as
great a risk to public health as active coal ash ponds.
35
Dominion has taken steps at its Chesterfield plant to
move coal ash from dangerous unlined ponds to lined
dry storage landfills. This should be the standard for
all retired coal ash ponds — in fact, this should be the
standard to protect families in Virginia and across the
United States. Groundwater monitoring should also be
required as well as regular reporting at any new dry
storage coal ash landfill.
In 2011, EPA gave a “poor” rating to the plant’s ash and
sedimentation pond. The pond is ranked a significant
hazard, because a failure would release toxic coal ash to
the Elizabeth River, which would flow into Chesapeake
Bay. The pond is contained by an earthen dam and
is unlined, holding fly ash, bottom ash, and leachate
contaminated with arsenic from the coal-fired power
plant. EPA identified the need to make “urgent” repairs
to address slope failures at the pond.88
T h e Battle fi e ld
G o lf Co u r s e D i saster
In spite of known contamination, beginning in
2002, Virginia Department of Environmental
Quality (VDEQ) allowed Dominion to use
1.5 million tons of coal ash to construct the
Battlefield Golf Course. The ash was dumped
(with cement kiln dust as a “binding agent”)
on swampy fields less than two feet above
a shallow groundwater table in the heart
of a residential neighborhood, where many
families relied on private wells for their
Local activists and environmental groups continue
drinking water. Dominion officials assured the
to seek justice, transparency, and greater protections
Chesapeake Planning Commission that their
from toxic coal ash pollution in Virginia. The example
ash was “as safe as dirt.” The Chesapeake
of Chesapeake Energy Center — and the related
City Council and VDEQ gave the plan a green
contamination of drinking water at Battle Creek Golf
light as a “beneficial use” of coal ash under
Course — illustrates the need for strong, federally
9 VAC 20-85 waiving liners or covers that
enforceable protections.
would have been required by the state’s solid
waste regulations.89 The result was polluted
D omi n i o n ’s Chesapeake
E nergy C en ter
Number of Coal
Ash Ponds
Total Known
Capacity
drinking water for nearby residents.
In 2009, Dominion agreed to pay $6 million
1
to provide city water to residents around
the golf course who abandoned their wells.
In 2012, nearly 400 residents filed a class
24,400,000 gallons91
action lawsuit seeking more than $2 billion
in damages from Dominion and others. The
Hazard Level
Significant
suit claims the actions of these defendants
contaminated their water and invaded
Known
Groundwater
Contamination
Arsenic 30 times higher
than safe standard92
their properties with clouds of coal ash
dust. Test results filed with the suit found
dangerous levels of lead, cadmium, nickel,
vanadium, manganese, cobalt, and zinc in
residential wells, and arsenic and beryllium
in monitoring wells. According to the suit,
which is still pending, constant exposure
to toxic dust caused chronic obstructive
pulmonary disease and asthma in ten
residents, nine of them children. Pets and
livestock were also harmed.90
36
Photo Credit: Catawba Riverkeeper
Case Study: The Dan River Spill
On February 2, 2014, a stormwater pipe burst underneath an unlined coal
ash pit at a retired Duke Energy coal plant in Eden, North Carolina. The Dan
River ran grey, as 39,000 tons of toxic coal ash and 27 million gallons of
contaminated wastewater flowed into it, threatening the drinking water for
eight counties downstream and coating the river bottom with toxic sludge for
70 miles.
For 24 hours after it was discovered, Duke Energy did
In all, it took Duke Energy nearly a week before workers
not so much as issue a press release or inform the public
were finally able to stem the flow of toxic coal ash into
about the massive spill. State officials initially told the
the Dan River. It was the third largest coal ash spill in our
public that state testing showed the water safe was
nation’s history and contaminated the Dan River with
drink (in spite of the enormous spill of coal ash known
dangerous levels of arsenic and other hazardous toxics.
to contain arsenic, selenium, lead, mercury, and many
Months later, downstream communities continue to
other toxic materials). They then backtracked and told
worry about the health risks — as well as the impacts on
the public that even direct contact with the water was
farming and tourism — from the toxic sludge.
not safe. Governor Pat McCrory, a former Duke Energy
employee, waited more than a week to speak publicly
about the disaster.
37
Public Demand for Solutions
Just weeks after the spill, North Carolinians rallied
at Duke Energy’s Charlotte headquarters delivering
Coal Ash Spill
Farmers along Dan River worry about livelihood
“Lost in the discussion has been the plight of farmers, whose
fields sit in the lowlands along the Dan in the back roads of
Rockingham and Caswell counties… ‘“I grow crops along here,
and all of them are consumed by humans and animals. I would not
like to be told I can’t farm here. I’d like some answers.’”93
petitions from 9,000 Duke Energy customers and
specially lined landfills (88%) and regulating coal ash as
demanding the disaster be “Our Last Coal Ash Spill.”
a hazardous substance (83%).94
Polling of North Carolina voters from March 2014 found
With mounting public pressure, both Duke Energy and
strong, across-the-board, support for new protections
state officials now promise significant action. But given
against future coal ash disasters — including stronger
their close ties and apparent priorities, North Carolinians
federal safeguards. Respondents from across the
— and indeed all Americans — would be well served by
political spectrum said that Duke Energy should clean
a new set of strong, enforceable safeguards for coal
up all coal ash sites in the state, including the Dan River
ash from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency —
spill (90% support). The poll found similar support
protections that are due by the end of 2014 and that
for requiring coal ash be stored away from water in
communities across the country desperately need.
38
ENDNOTES
1
http://www.epa.gov/osw/nonhaz/industrial/special/fossil/ccr-rule/transcripts/transcript-knoxville-tn.pdf
Illinois
2 http://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/StateofFailure_2013-04-05.pdf
3 http://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/library/references/il-coal-ash-factsheet.pdf
4 http://www.svgsierraclub.org/1/post/2014/02/speak-out-for-strong-rules-for-coal-ash-pits-at-illinois-power-plants.html
5 http://www.idph.state.il.us/envhealth/fishadvisory/
6 http://www.epa.state.il.us/public-notices/2013/ameren-edwards/index.pdf
7 http://www.epa.gov/osw/nonhaz/industrial/special/fossil/surveys/ameren.pdf
8 http://www.epa.gov/osw/nonhaz/industrial/special/fossil/surveys2/ameren_edwards_final.pdf
9 http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2013-08-19/environmental-concerns-remain-over-coal-ash-ponds.html
Indiana
10 http://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/library/references/in-coal-ash-factsheet.pdf
11 http://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/library/references/in-coal-ash-factsheet.pdf
13 http://www2.epa.gov/toxics-release-inventory-tri-program
14 http://naacp.3cdn.net/afe739fe212e246f76_i8m6yek0x.pdf
15 http://www.epa.gov/osw/nonhaz/industrial/special/fossil/surveys2/ipl-harding-final.pdf
17 https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1154382-hec-our-waters-at-risk-final-draft-5-4-2014-2.html
18 Boulding, Russell. Preliminary Analysis of Groundwater Contamination at Harding Street Generating Station Coal Ash Ponds, Indianapolis, Indiana. March 2014.
http://www.hecweb.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/HEC-Our-Waters-at-Risk-Appendices-May-5-2014-final.pdf
19 http://www.epa.gov/osw/nonhaz/industrial/special/fossil/surveys/ipl-harding.pdf
20 http://www.epa.gov/solidwaste/nonhaz/industrial/special/fossil/ccrs-fs/index.htm
21 April 29, 2014, email from Adam Rickert, Marion County Public Health Department.
22 http://www.epa.gov/osw/nonhaz/industrial/special/fossil/surveys2/index.htm
24 https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1154382-hec-our-waters-at-risk-final-draft-5-4-2014-2.html
25 http://ofmpub.epa.gov/waters10/attains_waterbody.control?p_list_id=INW01D6_M1075&p_report_type=T&p_cycle=2008
26 www.fish4health.net
27 Senior, Contance L., et al. Fate of Mercury Collected from Air Pollution Control Devices. U.S. EPA National Risk Management Research Laboratory.
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCgQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fcfpub.epa.gov%2Fsi%2Fsi_public_file_download.cfm%3Fp_
download_id%3D491053&ei=pDppU_LHEKacyQGqiYH4Cw&usg=AFQjCNFIWTP6OIEpAkgJHLMi2zMII8gZ2A&sig2=UvXt0lA2OB3WTxjFBHeJ4w&bvm=bv.66111022,d.aWc
Kentucky
29 http://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/files/ky-coal-ash-factsheet-1113.pdf
31 http://action.sierraclub.org/site/DocServer/ClosingTheFloodgates-Final.pdf
32 Dewberry. 2010b. Final Coal Combustion Waste Impoundment Task 3 Dam Assessment Report, E.W. Brown Plant, Auxiliary Pond Dam, Kentucky Utilities, Harrodsburg, KY, at
2-1. Prepared for U.S. EPA, February 2010.
33 Id.
34 Boulding, J.R. 2013 The Dangers of Constructing Coal Combustion Residual Landfill Over Old Landfills and Surface Impoundments. Prepared for Earthjustice, September 2,
2013 for Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–RCRA–2012–0028 U.S. EPA Notice of Data Availability (NODA) request for input on the practice of overfilling existing ash ponds (78 Fed. Reg.
46,946-46,947, August 2, 2013).
35 Id.
36 http://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/files/ky-coal-ash-factsheet-1113.pdf
37 http://www.epa.gov/osw/nonhaz/industrial/special/fossil/surveys/louisville-ge.pdf
38 Dewberry. 2010a. Final Coal Combustion Waste Impoundment Task 3 Dam Assessment Report, E.W. Brown Plant, Main Pond Dam, Kentucky Utilities, Harrodsburg, KY.
Prepared for U.S. EPA, February 2010. Available from: http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/nonhaz/industrial/special/fossil/surveys/index.htm
39 Permit Fact Sheet.
40 The Boulding Report.
41 Id.
42 http://meic.org/issues/montana-coal-facts/coal-ash-in-montana/
43 http://content.sierraclub.org/press-releases/2014/03/hidden-camera-operation-exposes-kentucky-utility-lge-dumping-dangerous-coal
Missouri
45 http://www.ameren.com/Environment/Documents/AshPondListingAmerenMissouri.pdf.
46 http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/nonhaz/industrial/special/fossil/coalash-faqs.htm#18
and http://www.epa.gov/solidwaste/nonhaz/industrial/special/fossil/surveys2/index.htm (July 2013)
47 http://www.epa.gov/osw/nonhaz/industrial/special/fossil/surveys/ameren-ue.pdf
48 Impacts of Meramec Ash Ponds on Local Groundwater and Surface Water,” Dec. 16, 1997. Received from DNR in response to a Sunshine Law request filed August 31, 2012.
49 Natural Resource Technology, Inc., Prepared for Ameren Energy Generating Company, “Phase I Hydrogeological Assessment Report, Coal Combustion Product
Impoundments, Coffeen Energy Center, Montgomery, IL,” at TSD000035, available at http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/COOL/External/CaseView.aspx?case=14595.
39
50 Washington University in St. Louis Interdisciplinary Environmental Law Clinic, Letter to Missouri Department of Natural Resources Director Sarah Parker Pauley, filed on May
23, 2013
http://action.sierraclub.org/site/DocServer/Groundwater_Monitoring_Letter_to_MO_DNR.pdf?docID=13221
51 http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metro/groups-urge-groundwater-monitoring-at-ameren-plants/article_8fa08031-edb1-501f-87fa-715810186260.html
52 http://action.sierraclub.org/site/DocServer/Groundwater_Monitoring_Letter_to_MO_DNR.pdf?docID=13221
Montana
53 http://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/mt-coal-ash-factsheet.pdf
54 http://deq.mt.gov/mfs/ColstripSteamElectricStation/default.mcpx
56 http://helenair.com/news/state-and-regional/million-settlement-reached-in-colstrip-lawsuit/article_d4c969b7-a6a5-5eab-9be8-8e2d8c7fa09d.html
57 http://deq.mt.gov/mfs/ColstripSteamElectricStation/colstripfaq.mcpx
59 http://www.epa.gov/osw/nonhaz/industrial/special/fossil/surveys2/ppl-colstrip-final.pdf
60 http://www.epa.gov/osw/nonhaz/industrial/special/fossil/coalash-faqs.htm
North Carolina
62 http://content.sierraclub.org/press-releases/2013/12/duke-energy-coal-ash-pollution-deforms-fish-sutton-lake-nc
63 http://www.reflector.com/ap/staten/nc-cites-5-duke-energy-plants-lacking-permits-2411039
64 http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/watch/warnings-ignored-ahead-of-toxic-nc-spill-146553923542
65 https://www.duke-energy.com/corporate-merger/
66 http://www.southeastcoalash.org/
67 http://www.citizen-times.com/story/news/local/2014/04/26/duke-ignored-requests-emergency-dam-plan-update/8224917/
68 http://www.carolinapublicpress.org/17121/national-economic-trends-are-one-thing-asheville-wnc-conditions-can-be-another
69 http://www.nccommerce.com/tourism/research/economic-impact/teim
70 http://content.sierraclub.org/press-releases/2014/03/duke-energy-offers-plan-remove-dangerous-coal-ash-pits-considers-retiring
71 http://www.epa.gov/osw/nonhaz/industrial/special/fossil/surveys2/statelet/nc_denr_let.pdf
72 http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/local&id=9473917
73 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/21/duke-energy-cape-fear-river_n_5003911.html
74 Earthjustice,”Environmental”Integrity”Project.””Out”of”Control:”Mounting”Damages”from”Coal”ash”Waste”Sites”(2010)”available”at”
http://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/library/reports/ejIeipreportoutIofIcontrolIfinal.pdf.”
New Mexico
75 http://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/library/references/nm-coal-ash-factsheet.pdf
76 http://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/library/reports/ej-eipreportout-of-control-final.pdf
77 http://www.aps.com/general_info/aboutAPS_18.html.
78 http://www.npca.org/protecting-our-parks/air-land-water/clean-air/Regional-Clean-Air-Programs/factsheet-navajo-generating-station.html
79 http://www.ntua.com/
80 Ross, L. 2007. Effects of Four Corner Power Plant Coal Combustion Waste Disposal on Surface and Groundwater Quality. Glenrose Engineering, Austin TX. Submitted to Lisa
Evans, Earthjustice (August 2007).
81 Evaluation of the Potential for Surface Water Quality Impacts From Fly Ash Disposal at the Navajo Mine, New Mexico, p. 12 (2005). Zimmerman, D.A., A Preliminary
82 http://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/library/reports/epa-coal-combustion-waste-risk-assessment.pdf
83 http://minorityhealth.hhs.gov/templates/browse.aspx?lvl=2&lvlID=52
Virginia
84 http://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/va-coal-ash-factsheet-0812.pdf
87 http://www.environmentalintegrity.org/news_reports/documents/INHARMSWAY_FINAL3.pdf
88 http://www.epa.gov/osw/nonhaz/industrial/special/fossil/surveys2/dom-chesa-power-final.pdf
89 http://www.psr.org/assets/pdfs/coal-ash.pdf
90 Virginia: Circuit Court for the City of Chesapeake, Fentress Families Trust, et. al. vs. Virginia Electric and Power Co. d/b/a Dominion Virginia Power, et. al.,
COMPLAINT, Feb. 21, 2012.
91 http://www.epa.gov/osw/nonhaz/industrial/special/fossil/surveys/dominion-va.pdf
93 http://www.godanriver.com/news/coal-ash/farmers-along-dan-river-worry-about-livelihood/article_7dae8718-b3b4-11e3-85f8-001a4bcf6878.html
94 http://content.sierraclub.org/press-releases/2014/03/new-poll-nc-shows-concern-coal-ash-call-strong-regulations
Sierra Club National
85 Second Street, 2nd Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105
(415) 977-5500
Sierra Club Legislative
50 F Street, NW, Eighth Floor
Washington, DC 20001
(202) 547-1141
sierraclub.org
facebook.com/SierraClub
twitter.com/SierraClub
40

DANGEROUS WATERS: AMERICA`S COAL ASH CRISIS

Transcription

Similar documents

M Esteira Deck Freixo Termotratado (24)

WET-TO-DRY CONVERSIONS FOR COAL POWER GENERATION

Ash tree dieback – autumn and winter signs

Marshalls Seedless Ash(CMYK)

STOKER.FIRED WARM AIR Model

Arizona Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. is the generation utility

Belews, N.C. fact sheet

Elkview Operations Environmental Policy